Victor Cruz was asked this morning on the Cowherd show which was the toughest team they played all year and his answer was Atlanta. He went on to talk about a change in their mindset from last year that they came out and was tougher and more like "we aren't last years playoff team". Continued to say they did a lot of shifting etc throughout the game to make it really tough on the opposing qb

Thought it was interesting and you can argue the Atlanta schedule all day but they have been very strong, strong in the second half and between White, Jones and Gonzales our defense will have their hands full.........

They remind me of our 2005 team in many ways. They don't have the "tough" label, but they can score a lot of points, don't let a lot of teams get into the end zone and are capable of kicking pretty good ass despite being seen as finesse.

While I think we beat ATL, there are still the #1 seed for a reason. People view them as a weak #1 in the manner of which they won games. They didn't put a lot of teams away, always played down to the level of competition, etc. They are good, but what makes me believe the Hawks ail win in how we much up against them. They could be 16-0 and could have destroyed every team they've played and I would still have confidence that the Hawks can go in there and get the W.

We are awesome at running the ball, they can't stop the run. They are terrible at getting to the QB and RW just happens to be very hard to take down. Isn't their secondary banged up too? As for our defense? Well we have the Legion of Boom and they don't run the ball extremely well. Tell Bruce to pin his ears back and to get Matt Ryan every play!

formido wrote:I wonder who Carolina would say is the toughest team they faced all year?

Basing off of Strength of Schedule they had the easiest schedule in the NFL this year...like easier than the Colts (who seem to get lambasted around here for how easy a schedule they had). Only played 2 playoff teams - Denver in week 2 and Washington in week 5...yeesh.

EDIT: Whoops for some reason thought that was Atlanta not Carolina..../chugs more coffee

Last edited by GCrow on Tue Jan 08, 2013 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Atlanta has Mike Nolan as their new DC this year. He's changed that defense and it is better than last years version. Great? No. The attitude has changed however and they've improved. On offense, they've added Koetter as their new OC. He was always a kind of run first, smashmouth kinda coach and now he's got to run an aerial offense, but he's changed their attitude on the other side of the ball as well.

These Falcons aren't as soft as they used to be.

Can we beat them? Yes. Will this be the most difficult game we've had all season? Probably.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."

If you got beat 34-0 then by definition it would HAVE to be the toughest game you played all year. it wouldn't matter if it was Kansas City that beat them, Cruz would be honest in saying that Kansas City was the toughest team they faced all year had KC blanked them 34-0.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."

For all that tout the "cupcake schedule" that Atlanta has had, remember they only play the games scheduled for them. Can't change that; can only win or lose them. And with a 13-3 record, with losses only against division rivals (two of them on the road), they're tougher than one might imagine. And while they still played their starters the last game of the season, there was really nothing to play for, and the win meant nothing but pride. They came out flat, and a division rival was just a touch better than they were.

This is the matchup I've been worried about for some time. This is the sleeper. This is far tougher than many give it credit for, and I don't like our chances. While we still have a chance, and while I'll be rooting for the win and believing we can pull it off until the full 60 is up, I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.Les Norton - gone but never forgotten. Rest in blue and green peace, my friend.

He is a guy that played the team we will be playing (anyone else on here do that? any of the experts do that?), he is a guy that gets paid millions to play the game we all love to watch so he may know something about it

You don't post the same thing when people mention INSERT EXPERT NAME HERE - you may say they suck but you most often (mel kiper excluded) don't question why a post is made about what they said.....

I agree with the comments about the 34-0 then I would say it is the toughest team. Now Giants win that game and they are pretty much in the playoffs if I remember correctly so it was an important game. It says something about Atlanta to put down a team like the Giants 34-0. I realize the giants didn't have the pass rush of prior years but it concerns me that they lost that big and I still thought it was interesting to listen to his thoughts on the show

you can't compare them to the 2005 team in my opinion.. turner vs. alexander = no contest.... they can be beat if you get them to be a one demintional team... take away their running game, make Ryan have to drop back 50+ times, that's how we beat brady. i would argue NE's recievers and tight ends are every bit as dangerous.

It's a valid point. Giants got shut out by Atlanta and the playoffs were on the line. These same (defending Super Bowl Champions) Giants CRUSHED the Niners. That's a quality win by Atlanta and even though the Giants failed to reach the playoffs this year, that is still an impressive win.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."

mikeak wrote:I agree with the comments about the 34-0 then I would say it is the toughest team. Now Giants win that game and they are pretty much in the playoffs if I remember correctly so it was an important game. It says something about Atlanta to put down a team like the Giants 34-0. I realize the giants didn't have the pass rush of prior years but it concerns me that they lost that big and I still thought it was interesting to listen to his thoughts on the show

Also interesting when you remember the Giants were supposed to totally dominate that game. Most of the pre-game hype had them going in and rolling Atlanta. Part of that whole "this is December, when the Giants suddenly start playing invincible football in their inevitable march to the playoffs and another strong post season" yada yada yada.

That was a statement game for Atlanta. Now they're faced with "Atlanta can't win in the playoffs" schtick. Don't think they don't have a chip the size of Titanic's iceberg on their shoulders going into this one.

World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.Les Norton - gone but never forgotten. Rest in blue and green peace, my friend.

hawker84 wrote:you can't compare them to the 2005 team in my opinion.. turner vs. alexander = no contest.... they can be beat if you get them to be a one demintional team... take away their running game, make Ryan have to drop back 50+ times, that's how we beat brady. i would argue NE's recievers and tight ends are every bit as dangerous.

the only argument i have against this is that the Falcons have been one dimensional all year, its nothing we havent faced and overcame before, now the Hawks have a great chance at a W, but just because on offense can be made one dimentional does not grant an automatic W

themunn wrote:let's be honest they got blown out so obviously he's going to say that

he's not going to say SF were more difficult because they breezed that game... doesn't mean Atlanta are a better team

To add to this point, the Falcons definitely went into that game with revenge on their minds after being embarrassed in last years playoffs where they only scored a safety against the Giants. They came out looking for blood against them this year.

mikeak wrote:I agree with the comments about the 34-0 then I would say it is the toughest team. Now Giants win that game and they are pretty much in the playoffs if I remember correctly so it was an important game. It says something about Atlanta to put down a team like the Giants 34-0. I realize the giants didn't have the pass rush of prior years but it concerns me that they lost that big and I still thought it was interesting to listen to his thoughts on the show

Also interesting when you remember the Giants were supposed to totally dominate that game. Most of the pre-game hype had them going in and rolling Atlanta. Part of that whole "this is December, when the Giants suddenly start playing invincible football in their inevitable march to the playoffs and another strong post season" yada yada yada.

That was a statement game for Atlanta. Now they're faced with "Atlanta can't win in the playoffs" schtick. Don't think they don't have a chip the size of Titanic's iceberg on their shoulders going into this one.

Sailor you could not be more correct. The Falcons will not only be playing for but "playing to" their home crowd and willride said schtick for all it's worth. This is going to be a very tough game.

A game of "keepaway" with Marshawn might work. Wouldn't like to see a shootout which I feel would work toAtlanta's advantage. Seahawks are certainly capable of winning this game but will have to overcome both a homecrowd and a team playing with a lot of attitude.

Seahawk Sailor wrote:That was a statement game for Atlanta. Now they're faced with "Atlanta can't win in the playoffs" schtick. Don't think they don't have a chip the size of Titanic's iceberg on their shoulders going into this one.

themunn wrote:let's be honest they got blown out so obviously he's going to say that

he's not going to say SF were more difficult because they breezed that game... doesn't mean Atlanta are a better team

To add to this point, the Falcons definitely went into that game with revenge on their minds after being embarrassed in last years playoffs where they only scored a safety against the Giants. They came out looking for blood against them this year.

and against the Seahawks they will look for blood for all the playoff failures........

I still think we can beat them but it will be the little things making the big difference

hawker84 wrote:you can't compare them to the 2005 team in my opinion.. turner vs. alexander = no contest.... they can be beat if you get them to be a one demintional team... take away their running game, make Ryan have to drop back 50+ times, that's how we beat brady. i would argue NE's recievers and tight ends are every bit as dangerous.

the only argument i have against this is that the Falcons have been one dimensional all year, its nothing we havent faced and overcame before, now the Hawks have a great chance at a W, but just because on offense can be made one dimentional does not grant an automatic W

i agree 100%, that's why i said they CAN be beat, and not they WILL be beat .

Seahawk Sailor wrote:Also interesting when you remember the Giants were supposed to totally dominate that game. Most of the pre-game hype had them going in and rolling Atlanta. Part of that whole "this is December, when the Giants suddenly start playing invincible football in their inevitable march to the playoffs and another strong post season" yada yada yada.

That was a statement game for Atlanta. Now they're faced with "Atlanta can't win in the playoffs" schtick. Don't think they don't have a chip the size of Titanic's iceberg on their shoulders going into this one.

Seahawk Sailor wrote: I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

I am with you on this. I am not trying to be negative but the loss of Clemons really hurts our D line and pass attack. I would be shocked if we win and if we lose, I won't be mad or too upset because I feel the Hawks are still a year or two away from being dominant. I will be watching and hoping for a miracle but not expecting one or so to speak. The SB should be Dever vs Atlanta IMO.

The Falcons were at home and had the whole revenge factor going for them after last year's playoffs. Coming off a loss to Carolina, they needed to make a statement or be deemed paper tigers. Plus, they knew winning this game would make it very difficult for the Giants to make the playoffs and hinder them there.

RiggoReincarnated wrote:The Falcons were at home and had the whole revenge factor going for them after last year's playoffs. Coming off a loss to Carolina, they needed to make a statement or be deemed paper tigers. Plus, they knew winning this game would make it very difficult for the Giants to make the playoffs and hinder them there.

If you truly believe that Falcons being at home and wanting revenge for past failures is enough for them to win with 34pts then we are in trouble.....

Seahawk Sailor wrote:For all that tout the "cupcake schedule" that Atlanta has had, remember they only play the games scheduled for them. Can't change that; can only win or lose them. And with a 13-3 record, with losses only against division rivals (two of them on the road), they're tougher than one might imagine. And while they still played their starters the last game of the season, there was really nothing to play for, and the win meant nothing but pride. They came out flat, and a division rival was just a touch better than they were.

This is the matchup I've been worried about for some time. This is the sleeper. This is far tougher than many give it credit for, and I don't like our chances. While we still have a chance, and while I'll be rooting for the win and believing we can pull it off until the full 60 is up, I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

have you seen their rankings? then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

not to mention the Hawks played one of their worst games of the season ginst the skins, they never give up 14 points in the first quarter and as of late they don't fumble in the red zone (and that was an incidental fumble) and they make those TD passes! the Hawks gave at least 4 TDs to the skins, even if they just make half its a blowout..

offense for the falcs is 8th, defense 24th, passing 6th, rushing 29th

how is that #6 passing going to stack up against the best pass defense in the league?

rushing? forget about it, they are 29th in the league rushing facing the #1 scoring defense in the entire league?

the falcs are playing whats likely the #1 defense in the playoffs right now and at least the #3-4 offense, how are they going to stop an offense like that with the 24th ranked defense in the league?

it deosnt make any sense, I know the Hawks didn't play up to their caliber but if they bounce back c'mon man the numbers are WAY off?

Seahawk Sailor wrote:For all that tout the "cupcake schedule" that Atlanta has had, remember they only play the games scheduled for them. Can't change that; can only win or lose them. And with a 13-3 record, with losses only against division rivals (two of them on the road), they're tougher than one might imagine. And while they still played their starters the last game of the season, there was really nothing to play for, and the win meant nothing but pride. They came out flat, and a division rival was just a touch better than they were.

This is the matchup I've been worried about for some time. This is the sleeper. This is far tougher than many give it credit for, and I don't like our chances. While we still have a chance, and while I'll be rooting for the win and believing we can pull it off until the full 60 is up, I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

have you seen their rankings? then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

not to mention the Hawks played one of their worst games of the season ginst the skins, they never give up 14 points in the first quarter and as of late they don't fumble in the red zone (and that was an incidental fumble) and they make those TD passes! the Hawks gave at least 4 TDs to the skins, even if they just make half its a blowout..

offense for the falcs is 8th, defense 24th, passing 6th, rushing 29th

how is that #6 passing going to stack up against the best pass defense in the league?

rushing? forget about it, they are 29th in the league rushing facing the #1 scoring defense in the entire league?

the falcs are playing whats likely the #1 defense in the playoffs right now and at least the #3-4 offense, how are they going to stop an offense like that with the 24th ranked defense in the league?

it deosnt make any sense, I know the Hawks didn't play up to their caliber but if they bounce back c'mon man the numbers are WAY off?

ah yes because the skins are as good as the Falcons -_-, just dont be surprised when ATL shows up and your "o they played a weak schedule" argument goes out the window when they play with more intensity than they did against NY

Seahawk Sailor wrote:For all that tout the "cupcake schedule" that Atlanta has had, remember they only play the games scheduled for them. Can't change that; can only win or lose them. And with a 13-3 record, with losses only against division rivals (two of them on the road), they're tougher than one might imagine. And while they still played their starters the last game of the season, there was really nothing to play for, and the win meant nothing but pride. They came out flat, and a division rival was just a touch better than they were.

This is the matchup I've been worried about for some time. This is the sleeper. This is far tougher than many give it credit for, and I don't like our chances. While we still have a chance, and while I'll be rooting for the win and believing we can pull it off until the full 60 is up, I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

have you seen their rankings? then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

not to mention the Hawks played one of their worst games of the season ginst the skins, they never give up 14 points in the first quarter and as of late they don't fumble in the red zone (and that was an incidental fumble) and they make those TD passes! the Hawks gave at least 4 TDs to the skins, even if they just make half its a blowout..

offense for the falcs is 8th, defense 24th, passing 6th, rushing 29th

how is that #6 passing going to stack up against the best pass defense in the league?

rushing? forget about it, they are 29th in the league rushing facing the #1 scoring defense in the entire league?

the falcs are playing whats likely the #1 defense in the playoffs right now and at least the #3-4 offense, how are they going to stop an offense like that with the 24th ranked defense in the league?

it deosnt make any sense, I know the Hawks didn't play up to their caliber but if they bounce back c'mon man the numbers are WAY off?

Thats pure speculation. For all you know he would have walked up the field and scored on you every offensive possession.

We are #5 in scoring defense. You may move the ball on us, but not many times do teams end up in the endzone.

That 29th ranked rushing offense didn't matter 13 other games. We utilize the screen game as our running game and it works beautifully.

If we were playing at your house, I'd think we may be in trouble. But you are coming to us.

The only top 10 pass offense you played on the road this season was detroit. If Stafford could move the ball on you at will, Ryan should be able to also. In fact 10 of your games were against bottom 12 passing offenses. Maybe I could say your Pass D never got tested.

Here is the kicker none of the stats, nothing you said, and nothing i said means jack. We have to play the game. Heres to a good one.

the Skins were ranked higher than the falcs in many departments, falcs played the skins early on when they were a different team and it was a very close game, 24-17 falcs... this was week 5 when the skins were finding their footing just like the hawks were..

week 17 skins were;

1st in rushing6th in defense4th in pts scored5th in yrds

c'mon man the falcs have the 24th ranked defense in the league? huh? and against who? GB, Pats, Vikes, Bears, SF? I think not! Hawks have beat sum teams this season all of the above,

AGAIN! 4 of those teams the Hawks BEAT made the playoffs!

who the falcs play, oh thats right, the bolts, the raiders, the eagles, the panthers, saints, giants, bucs, cards? you cant be serious man, the falcs had the same strength of schedule as the hawks? OK..

Hawks had a very tough schedule and they still put up great numbers, Seahawks had a bad day last Sunday and I think the seahawks had a case of the playoff gidders? very young and all the hype may have caught up with them? was some of it redskins talent? I suspect so.. was some of it not wanting to be the one that destroyed RGs career? I suspect so as well..

you note when RG was out and a HEALTHY QB was in the game it totally FLIPPED, Hawks D went on the WAR PATH!!!

Hawks will be totally unleashed in the east with nothing to hold them back, no drama, no sympathy, nuttin, its all or nothing and all I can say to the Falcons defense is, you're #29 for a reason.. and to their offense? better pack a lunch...

NinjaKixx wrote:Here is the kicker none of the stats, nothing you said, and nothing i said means jack. We have to play the game. Heres to a good one.

thats all true but I'm not going to ignore reality, Seattle just has the edge mainly due to having to survive playing powerhouses all year long with having maybe one or two gimmies? falcs on the other hand?

anything can happen but its not going to be a cake walk for the falcs unless the hawks just decide to throw in the towel, after winning in Chicago and beating the Redskins in the wild card game I suspect there is no longer an away crutch for the hawks and I suspect they are going to dial in and play ball, Seahawks style..

but you are right it is going to be a good one... bout all we can ask for I guess?

Makes sense that he would pick a team where he had one of his worst performances against and I appreciate the honesty. Falcons have shown up in all their primetime games this year. I'm just hoping they can continue the trend this Sunday.

Seahawk Sailor wrote: I have a sneaky feeling we're going to see at the end of this game that this team is still only in year three of the rebuild, and we're not quite there yet. I hope like hell I'm proven wrong, but I haven't seen any reason to believe I will be.

I am with you on this. I am not trying to be negative but the loss of Clemons really hurts our D line and pass attack. I would be shocked if we win and if we lose, I won't be mad or too upset because I feel the Hawks are still a year or two away from being dominant. I will be watching and hoping for a miracle but not expecting one or so to speak. The SB should be Dever vs Atlanta IMO.

Don't take this the wrong way but the lack of confidence in both these posts makes me sick. If you don't have the ultimate confidence in this team the way they've played the second half of the season I honestly have no clue what they could of done to sway you. "The SB should be Denver vs. Atlanta"???? I don't even know what to say about this statement other than I'd hate to have you as a fan. This team is capable of beating any team remaining in the playoffs and while the loss of Clem is huge its absolutely not the end of the world. IF the falcons beat us it will be through the air making pressure on Ryan important and our secondary play paramount. Clem while I love him, stacked his sacks in individual games meaning he would get 3 one game the 0 for three consecutive games. They weren't evenly spread out over the season. We dont need to sack Ryan we just need a guy to make Ryan rush his passes our secondary will take care of the rest. If you don't think the Hawks are gonna win fine, but writing this team off or saying if they win it will be a miracle is the kind of defeatist mentality I despise in a fellow Seahawks fan.

HawkGANG wrote:Don't take this the wrong way but the lack of confidence in both these posts makes me sick. If you don't have the ultimate confidence in this team the way they've played the second half of the season I honestly have no clue what they could of done to sway you. "The SB should be Denver vs. Atlanta"???? I don't even know what to say about this statement other than I'd hate to have you as a fan. This team is capable of beating any team remaining in the playoffs and while the loss of Clem is huge its absolutely not the end of the world. IF the falcons beat us it will be through the air making pressure on Ryan important and our secondary play paramount. Clem while I love him, stacked his sacks in individual games meaning he would get 3 one game the 0 for three consecutive games. They weren't evenly spread out over the season. We dont need to sack Ryan we just need a guy to make Ryan rush his passes our secondary will take care of the rest. If you don't think the Hawks are gonna win fine, but writing this team off or saying if they win it will be a miracle is the kind of defeatist mentality I despise in a fellow Seahawks fan.

Twisted wrote: then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

There have been several Super Bowl champions over the years who didn't have a good strength of victory. The most glaring was the '99 Rams who played only one team with a winning record and lost. Three teams that had 8 wins and most of the other teams had 5 or less wins. It didn't stop them from going to and winning the Super Bowl.

Twisted wrote: then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

There have been several Super Bowl champions over the years who didn't have a good strength of victory. The most glaring was the '99 Rams who played only one team with a winning record and lost. Three teams that had 8 wins and most of the other teams had 5 or less wins. It didn't stop them from going to and winning the Super Bowl.

Good point for anyone who over-obsesses on stats to cling to an argument. Having said that, honestly, the only reason I quoted this was to say, "THERE...ARE...FOUR...LIGHTS!"

Twisted wrote: then theres strength of schedule and yes SOS does count for something as we saw in the redskins, hawks 7th toughest, skins 23rd AND IT SHOWED, even with a healthy RG they lose that match up!

There have been several Super Bowl champions over the years who didn't have a good strength of victory. The most glaring was the '99 Rams who played only one team with a winning record and lost. Three teams that had 8 wins and most of the other teams had 5 or less wins. It didn't stop them from going to and winning the Super Bowl.

Good point for anyone who over-obsesses on stats to cling to an argument. Having said that, honestly, the only reason I quoted this was to say, "THERE...ARE...FOUR...LIGHTS!"

Thanks, I thought the avatar was clever, since the only thing anyone was telling us daily after we drafted him, as though they were trying to convince us (much like that episode) was that Irvin was a reach. Glad someone recognized it other than The Radish.